This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Authors. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
watch |
For the general policy on the inclusion of individual people in Wikipedia, see WP:BIO.
WP:BEFORE doesn't bring anything except websites selling his books, so I very much don't think he meets
WP:GNG. (Additionally, a lot of the article is highly promotional in tone, although that's fixable and deletion is not cleanup) Most of the tone issues have been fixed.
Chaotic Enby (
talk ·
contribs)
20:56, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
I couldn't find out if this person, a Saudi author is notable as per WP:GNG. Duke of New Gwynedd ( talk | contrib.) 08:43, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
No indication of importance. I have a degree, I founded a small consultancy, I wrote some articles, I wrote a book. BrigadierG ( talk) 10:17, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
I found no significant coverage, there is none in the article, and it reads like an advertisement. A PROD was contested in 2013. SL93 ( talk) 01:32, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable cricket writer. Article was previously deleted in 2007, but there is still no evidence of the subject's notability. – Pee Jay 11:41, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NPOL, WP:NAUTHOR, WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. No sufficient source to satisfy any application specific or general criteria. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 13:54, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
I cannot find any independent reliable sources with coverage of Campbell. As one of teams of people, he is credited on multiple notable role-playing games. I think it's stretching
NAUTHOR #3 beyond the intent of that SNG to consider every person who is credited on those games as inherently notable. (#3: "...has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work"
) I cannot find any reviews of any of those games that call out Campbell's contributions.
Schazjmd
(talk)
14:10, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
This article was previously deleted last December because Kiper was deemed non-notable. An editor re-created the page today on the basis that Kiper was included in a single poll, which doesn't really address the fundamental lack of notability and is a perfect example of WP:ROTM campaign coverage (if you even consider it coverage). They also added 5 new sources: a press release from Kiper's website, three clearly WP:ROTM news articles (one just says he filed to run and the other two are about candidate forums he appeared at), and the aforementioned poll. I don't see how any of this overrides the finding of the previous deletion discussion. BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk) 00:40, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Not particularly relevant as an essayist, nor as a lecturer. Excellent career, no doubt, but rather in the normal range. Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 10:44, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Broc ( talk) 15:28, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Article about a non-notable religious leader and speaker. Fails WP:GNG. Sources are self-published and opinion piece. No actual WP:SIGCOV on the subject. Maybe a case of WP:TOOSOON. Jamiebuba ( talk) 07:49, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
WP:BLP of a writer, not
properly sourced as passing
WP:AUTHOR. The attempted notability claim here, that she won a literary award, would be fine if the article were sourced properly, but is not "inherently" notable without sourcing -- an award has to itself be a notable award in the first place before it can make its winners notable for winning it, so an award claim cannot clinch inclusion without sourcing for it. But I had to remove the citation that was present here as it led to a squatted page that tried to make me download a virus rather than anything that verified any literary awards, and that left the article completely unsourced — and going by its URL it looks to have been a
primary source, not a reliable or GNG-building one, even before it got squatted.
Meanwhile, the award she purportedly won does not have a Wikipedia article at all, and instead substitutes a link to the biography of the other unrelated writer the award was named for, which is not in and of itself proof that the award is a notable one.
On a
WP:BEFORE search, meanwhile, the closest thing to an acceptable source I found was one
book review on a
WordPress blog -- and even if I were to overlook the fact that it's WordPress, I just can't overlook the even bigger issue with it: this article was created in 2011 by an editor with the username Mohammad Rajabpur, while that WordPress review was written in 2020 with a bylined author credit of Mohammad Rajabpur, strongly implying the possibility of
conflict of interest editing by a friend or colleague. And I can otherwise confirm that she's never had any
WP:GNG-worthy coverage in Canada at all, as her name brings up absolutely nothing in either ProQuest or Newspapers.com.
Since I cannot read Farsi, I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with better access to Iranian media than I've got can find evidence that she's had GNG-worthy coverage in Iran, but nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to have any sources.
Bearcat (
talk)
17:51, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
WP:BLP of a textbook translator, not
properly referenced as passing inclusion criteria for translators. The strongest notability claim here, that he won a private internal award from a trade association, is not an automatic notability freebie without
WP:GNG-worthy sourcing -- but the only attempt at "referencing" here is one of his books metaverifying its own existence, which is not the kind of sourcing we need to see.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to be referenced better than this. And we're much stricter on referencing articles properly than we were 20 years ago, so the fact that this was kept in an AFD discussion in 2005 is not definitive, especially since even some of the keep arguments at the time called for improvement that the article never saw.
Bearcat (
talk)
16:41, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
I am nominating this article for deletion because of persistent issues that have not been addressed despite discussions on the talk page. The main concerns include: - **POV (Point of View) Issues**: The article heavily reflects the claims and views of the biographed person without sufficient neutral coverage. - **Lack of Reliable Sources**: The content relies predominantly on sources that do not meet Wikipedia's reliability standards. - **Notability Concerns**: The subject does not meet the general notability guideline as the article lacks significant coverage from independent, reliable sources. - **Content Focus**: The article focuses more on claims made by the person rather than providing a balanced biographical account, which is a core requirement for biographical articles on Wikipedia. These issues combined lead to the conclusion that the article may not be suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form.
Looking into the bibliography at least four of them seems to be self-published, or published on "print-on-demand" publishing companys."Recito":
"Recito is an innovative publisher specializing in small print runs and making the publishing world accessible to authors. We work closely with our authors to create wonderful books, and because we are experts in small print runs, we can test the market with each book without having to predict the future or risk mistakenly rejecting a manuscript." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franke1281 ( talk • contribs) 09:06, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:37, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable individual. Fails WP:NAUTHOR and WP:GNG. Ratnahastin ( talk) 16:53, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.
- If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
Sources
The book notes: "Born September 5, 1954, in India, G.B. Singh eventually moved to the United States where he attended the University of Oklahoma. Educated as a periodontist, Singh joined the United States Army Medical Department, launching his career in the military. He gradually rose through the ranks, attaining the position of colonel, unusual in that he is one of few Sikh-American's to ever achieve such a high rank within a branch of the United States armed forces. Sikh-Americans who wear turbans must receive special dispensation if they are to be allowed to hold higher military ranks, and none of them are allowed to be part of units that go into combat. Singh wears his turban proudly along with his military uniform, a trait that has caused considerable talk in this post-9/11 world. While performing his duties, Singh has been stationed all across the country, and has also been stationed in Korea twice. Beyond his work for the Army, Singh is also a student of Indian politics, study- ing that nation's political history and religion, particularly Hinduism, and the life and works of Gandhi."
The article notes: "Yet, Col. G.B. Singh isn't obeying the rules. His first book, "Gandhi: Behind the Mask of Divinity," portrays Gandhi as one of the most dangerous leaders of the 20th century. ... The book is the culmination of 20 years of research, as Singh evolved from one of Gandhi's admirers to one of his harshest critics. ... Singh has a kindly face framed by a dense beard and turban. He appears gentle and soft-spoken until he delves into the subject of Gandhi. Then his passion flares. Singh was born in India to a family of Hindus and Sikhs. He was educated in the scriptures, and he was trained in the godlike worship of Mahatma Gandhi. ... Singh became a periodontist and emigrated to the United States in 1976. He joined the Army and rose to the rank of colonel, making him one of the highest-ranking officers in the U.S. military to wear a turban."
G. B. Singh received a 1,760-word profile in The Gazette (Colorado Springs). The Gazette is a respected regional newspaper that won Pulitzer Prizes in 1990 and 2014. Colorado Springs is the second-most populous city in the state of Colorado, and the 39th-most-populous city in the United States.
The two sources were published five years apart. WP:BLP1E does not apply to an author who has received this level of coverage. WP:BLP1E does not apply because neither "Reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event" nor "The person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual" apply. G. B. Singh clearly passes Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline and Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
21:09, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
WP:MILL journalist, does not fulfill WP:NJOURNALIST criteria. Broc ( talk) 21:26, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
20:28, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
*Keep Sources provided by Oaktree b above are sufficient to satisfy
WP:AUTHOR.
Sal2100 (
talk)
21:20, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. So far I see one independent review posted by Oaktree b, and there is one extremely short blurb in Publisher's Weekly as mentioned below. No other independent reviews have been found, so I wonder how you think the criterion is fulfilled? Broc ( talk) 15:11, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
I've cleaned this article up a bit but after looking for additional information to add more substance, I don't think this meets WP:GNG. He's certainly had his name attached to many published papers, but they are pretty niche in content and many co-authors don't have their own pages. Looking at the page history, it appears that this may have been initially authored by a student or someone associated with him. Most recently, an IP user copy/pasted a numbered list of his papers but started at "112" which makes me think it came from somewhere else, but I can't find where. Lindsey40186 (talk) 01:09, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
01:32, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
The article does not meet the notability requirement NBV2010 ( talk) 19:27, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
19:50, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Reopened and relisted as an uninvolved admin in my individual capacity, per
WP:NACD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
08:19, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
sufficient coverage to justify notability per WP:NAUTHOR? Toadspike [Talk] 08:48, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
I nominated this before but it was closed as no consensus since there were no other participates. Same reasoning as before applies: fails WP:MUSICBIO and quite promotional. Can’t find any in-depth sources on the subject. The cited Washington Post article [17] is about the subject’s father, Wayne Stetina. Dr. Swag Lord ( talk) 21:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
The articles below are relaible,
And these below are helpful,
Easily notable! He's had a huge influence on a good amount of major notable guitarists. I can find more but I have been drawn into this as I do sometimes and have neglected other stuff.
Thanks
Going on what user Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert said earlier with "together they peek just over the edge", well with what I've come up with, the interviews by respected news sources etc., his contributions to major music magazines etc., collectively they well and truly sit on top of the table. And the Modern Drummer review proves it more. And this below, a C&P of what I edited into the article page,
According to La Scena Musicale, Stetina was booked along with Leo Kottke, Antoine Dufour, Ana Vidovic, and Jonathan Kreisberg to appear at the Wilson Center Guitar Competition & Festival which ran from August 13 to 15, 2015, at the Sharon Lynne Wilson Center for the Arts. La Scena Musicale, 3 August 2015 - International Guitar Legends Headlining Wilson Center Guitar Competition & Festival: 2015 Artists include Leo Kottke, Antoine Dufour, Ana Vidovic, Jonathan Kreisberg, Troy Stetina
It's obvious when Stetina is mentioned in the same headline such as these premier artists, he's well and widely known in various fields and notable. His volume of work speaks for itself, especially when artists such as Mark Tremonti, Michael Angelo Batio, Bill Peck, and Eric Friedman appear on Troy Stetina: The Sound and the Story etc. etc.. For him not to be notable would be an exception to the rule.
Yes, I see that you've opened an RSN discussion on Metal Shock. OK, what can I say.
The fact that Stetina has written for two of the two of the biggest selling guitar mags is additional proof of his status. He was employed by Guitar One and wrote for Guitar World. Just a quick grab of the Ozwinds site where it says, "Go inside the mind of one of the most accomplished guitar instructors in history", you said something previously that this was copied from his website. Well, perhaps one or two others may have done this, or he has copied on to his website what has been said about him. Most to the majority of sites refer to him as something similar, I guess this is because this is what he is!
To tell the truth I'm not that keen on heavy metal or this type of music. I had heard of Stetina in the past but didn't know that much about him. If I didn't think he was notable I would have just gone for a re-direct or maybe wouldn't have bothered at all.
Karl Twist ( talk) 06:56, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as I don't see a consensus yet and different assessments of the existing sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
21:29, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Source assessment table:
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
Left-Handed Guitar: The Complete Method by Stetina, Troy | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
Fretboard Mastery [With CD] by Troy Stetina | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
Guitar Noise | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
Modern Drummer Issue 166 | ![]() |
![]() |
~ This is a review of one of Stetina's books. There is no mention/ WP:SIGCOV of Stetina at all | ~ Partial |
Guitar One Magazine February 2006 | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
OnMilwaukee Interview | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
Metalshockfinland | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
Maximum Ink Interview | ![]() |
? A non-notable, local music magazine. Can't find editorial polices, editorial board, etc.. The interview also contains a link to Stetina's Wikipedia page at the bottom and links to purchase the subject's CDs. Appears WP:QS and WP:PROMOTIONAL | ![]() |
✘ No |
guitariste-metal.fr | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
Ad in La Seine Musicale | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
The Journal Times | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✔ Yes |
Billboard Jan 1995 | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
www.ultimate-guitar.com | ? Likely a press release | ![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
Musicradar | ![]() |
![]() |
~ | ✘ No |
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}. |
Dr. Swag Lord ( talk) 20:26, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
I even more stand by what I said that Stetina is a notable subject. His being a writer for two of the largest guitar mags in the US as well as holding guitar clinics in events that have internationally known prestigious artists is just one aspect. Many others ... etc. etc. etc. Below is an interesting indicator from Jstor,
...and Heavy Metal Lead Guitar Vol. 1&2 by Troy Stetina are two such examples. Also noteworthy is his 1991,
Speed Mechanics for Lead Guitar In an interview with Guitariste Métal, Stetina was asked about his sales figure
he replied: Speed Mechanics for Lead Guitar is the biggest seller now. Maybe 300,000...
Thanks Karl Twist ( talk) 04:35, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
11:38, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
I'd originally PROD'ed this, that was removed. Bringing it to AfD as I still don't think the sources support notability. I was and am unable to find sourcing about this individual, only things they've written. Unsure if this would pass academic notability or notability for business people. Oaktree b ( talk) 18:56, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:19, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
...and so on. My thinking is that Cooper is too early in his career to have become ‘notable’ in the sense we use here. --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 01:37, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More discussion as to whether this individual passes
WP:NPROF's subject-specific criteria would be helpful in achieving a consensus here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
Red-tailed hawk
(nest)
01:28, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist in lieu of closing this as "No consensus". As one editor stated, this is borderline, with different editors assessing PROF contributions differently so we need to move the needle one way or the other.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
01:25, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Authors. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
watch |
For the general policy on the inclusion of individual people in Wikipedia, see WP:BIO.
WP:BEFORE doesn't bring anything except websites selling his books, so I very much don't think he meets
WP:GNG. (Additionally, a lot of the article is highly promotional in tone, although that's fixable and deletion is not cleanup) Most of the tone issues have been fixed.
Chaotic Enby (
talk ·
contribs)
20:56, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
I couldn't find out if this person, a Saudi author is notable as per WP:GNG. Duke of New Gwynedd ( talk | contrib.) 08:43, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
No indication of importance. I have a degree, I founded a small consultancy, I wrote some articles, I wrote a book. BrigadierG ( talk) 10:17, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
I found no significant coverage, there is none in the article, and it reads like an advertisement. A PROD was contested in 2013. SL93 ( talk) 01:32, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable cricket writer. Article was previously deleted in 2007, but there is still no evidence of the subject's notability. – Pee Jay 11:41, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NPOL, WP:NAUTHOR, WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. No sufficient source to satisfy any application specific or general criteria. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 13:54, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
I cannot find any independent reliable sources with coverage of Campbell. As one of teams of people, he is credited on multiple notable role-playing games. I think it's stretching
NAUTHOR #3 beyond the intent of that SNG to consider every person who is credited on those games as inherently notable. (#3: "...has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work"
) I cannot find any reviews of any of those games that call out Campbell's contributions.
Schazjmd
(talk)
14:10, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
This article was previously deleted last December because Kiper was deemed non-notable. An editor re-created the page today on the basis that Kiper was included in a single poll, which doesn't really address the fundamental lack of notability and is a perfect example of WP:ROTM campaign coverage (if you even consider it coverage). They also added 5 new sources: a press release from Kiper's website, three clearly WP:ROTM news articles (one just says he filed to run and the other two are about candidate forums he appeared at), and the aforementioned poll. I don't see how any of this overrides the finding of the previous deletion discussion. BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk) 00:40, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Not particularly relevant as an essayist, nor as a lecturer. Excellent career, no doubt, but rather in the normal range. Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 10:44, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Broc ( talk) 15:28, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Article about a non-notable religious leader and speaker. Fails WP:GNG. Sources are self-published and opinion piece. No actual WP:SIGCOV on the subject. Maybe a case of WP:TOOSOON. Jamiebuba ( talk) 07:49, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
WP:BLP of a writer, not
properly sourced as passing
WP:AUTHOR. The attempted notability claim here, that she won a literary award, would be fine if the article were sourced properly, but is not "inherently" notable without sourcing -- an award has to itself be a notable award in the first place before it can make its winners notable for winning it, so an award claim cannot clinch inclusion without sourcing for it. But I had to remove the citation that was present here as it led to a squatted page that tried to make me download a virus rather than anything that verified any literary awards, and that left the article completely unsourced — and going by its URL it looks to have been a
primary source, not a reliable or GNG-building one, even before it got squatted.
Meanwhile, the award she purportedly won does not have a Wikipedia article at all, and instead substitutes a link to the biography of the other unrelated writer the award was named for, which is not in and of itself proof that the award is a notable one.
On a
WP:BEFORE search, meanwhile, the closest thing to an acceptable source I found was one
book review on a
WordPress blog -- and even if I were to overlook the fact that it's WordPress, I just can't overlook the even bigger issue with it: this article was created in 2011 by an editor with the username Mohammad Rajabpur, while that WordPress review was written in 2020 with a bylined author credit of Mohammad Rajabpur, strongly implying the possibility of
conflict of interest editing by a friend or colleague. And I can otherwise confirm that she's never had any
WP:GNG-worthy coverage in Canada at all, as her name brings up absolutely nothing in either ProQuest or Newspapers.com.
Since I cannot read Farsi, I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with better access to Iranian media than I've got can find evidence that she's had GNG-worthy coverage in Iran, but nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to have any sources.
Bearcat (
talk)
17:51, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
WP:BLP of a textbook translator, not
properly referenced as passing inclusion criteria for translators. The strongest notability claim here, that he won a private internal award from a trade association, is not an automatic notability freebie without
WP:GNG-worthy sourcing -- but the only attempt at "referencing" here is one of his books metaverifying its own existence, which is not the kind of sourcing we need to see.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to be referenced better than this. And we're much stricter on referencing articles properly than we were 20 years ago, so the fact that this was kept in an AFD discussion in 2005 is not definitive, especially since even some of the keep arguments at the time called for improvement that the article never saw.
Bearcat (
talk)
16:41, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
I am nominating this article for deletion because of persistent issues that have not been addressed despite discussions on the talk page. The main concerns include: - **POV (Point of View) Issues**: The article heavily reflects the claims and views of the biographed person without sufficient neutral coverage. - **Lack of Reliable Sources**: The content relies predominantly on sources that do not meet Wikipedia's reliability standards. - **Notability Concerns**: The subject does not meet the general notability guideline as the article lacks significant coverage from independent, reliable sources. - **Content Focus**: The article focuses more on claims made by the person rather than providing a balanced biographical account, which is a core requirement for biographical articles on Wikipedia. These issues combined lead to the conclusion that the article may not be suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form.
Looking into the bibliography at least four of them seems to be self-published, or published on "print-on-demand" publishing companys."Recito":
"Recito is an innovative publisher specializing in small print runs and making the publishing world accessible to authors. We work closely with our authors to create wonderful books, and because we are experts in small print runs, we can test the market with each book without having to predict the future or risk mistakenly rejecting a manuscript." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franke1281 ( talk • contribs) 09:06, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:37, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Non-notable individual. Fails WP:NAUTHOR and WP:GNG. Ratnahastin ( talk) 16:53, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.
- If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
Sources
The book notes: "Born September 5, 1954, in India, G.B. Singh eventually moved to the United States where he attended the University of Oklahoma. Educated as a periodontist, Singh joined the United States Army Medical Department, launching his career in the military. He gradually rose through the ranks, attaining the position of colonel, unusual in that he is one of few Sikh-American's to ever achieve such a high rank within a branch of the United States armed forces. Sikh-Americans who wear turbans must receive special dispensation if they are to be allowed to hold higher military ranks, and none of them are allowed to be part of units that go into combat. Singh wears his turban proudly along with his military uniform, a trait that has caused considerable talk in this post-9/11 world. While performing his duties, Singh has been stationed all across the country, and has also been stationed in Korea twice. Beyond his work for the Army, Singh is also a student of Indian politics, study- ing that nation's political history and religion, particularly Hinduism, and the life and works of Gandhi."
The article notes: "Yet, Col. G.B. Singh isn't obeying the rules. His first book, "Gandhi: Behind the Mask of Divinity," portrays Gandhi as one of the most dangerous leaders of the 20th century. ... The book is the culmination of 20 years of research, as Singh evolved from one of Gandhi's admirers to one of his harshest critics. ... Singh has a kindly face framed by a dense beard and turban. He appears gentle and soft-spoken until he delves into the subject of Gandhi. Then his passion flares. Singh was born in India to a family of Hindus and Sikhs. He was educated in the scriptures, and he was trained in the godlike worship of Mahatma Gandhi. ... Singh became a periodontist and emigrated to the United States in 1976. He joined the Army and rose to the rank of colonel, making him one of the highest-ranking officers in the U.S. military to wear a turban."
G. B. Singh received a 1,760-word profile in The Gazette (Colorado Springs). The Gazette is a respected regional newspaper that won Pulitzer Prizes in 1990 and 2014. Colorado Springs is the second-most populous city in the state of Colorado, and the 39th-most-populous city in the United States.
The two sources were published five years apart. WP:BLP1E does not apply to an author who has received this level of coverage. WP:BLP1E does not apply because neither "Reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event" nor "The person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual" apply. G. B. Singh clearly passes Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline and Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
21:09, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
WP:MILL journalist, does not fulfill WP:NJOURNALIST criteria. Broc ( talk) 21:26, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
20:28, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
*Keep Sources provided by Oaktree b above are sufficient to satisfy
WP:AUTHOR.
Sal2100 (
talk)
21:20, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. So far I see one independent review posted by Oaktree b, and there is one extremely short blurb in Publisher's Weekly as mentioned below. No other independent reviews have been found, so I wonder how you think the criterion is fulfilled? Broc ( talk) 15:11, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
I've cleaned this article up a bit but after looking for additional information to add more substance, I don't think this meets WP:GNG. He's certainly had his name attached to many published papers, but they are pretty niche in content and many co-authors don't have their own pages. Looking at the page history, it appears that this may have been initially authored by a student or someone associated with him. Most recently, an IP user copy/pasted a numbered list of his papers but started at "112" which makes me think it came from somewhere else, but I can't find where. Lindsey40186 (talk) 01:09, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
01:32, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
The article does not meet the notability requirement NBV2010 ( talk) 19:27, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
19:50, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Reopened and relisted as an uninvolved admin in my individual capacity, per
WP:NACD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
08:19, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
sufficient coverage to justify notability per WP:NAUTHOR? Toadspike [Talk] 08:48, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
I nominated this before but it was closed as no consensus since there were no other participates. Same reasoning as before applies: fails WP:MUSICBIO and quite promotional. Can’t find any in-depth sources on the subject. The cited Washington Post article [17] is about the subject’s father, Wayne Stetina. Dr. Swag Lord ( talk) 21:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
The articles below are relaible,
And these below are helpful,
Easily notable! He's had a huge influence on a good amount of major notable guitarists. I can find more but I have been drawn into this as I do sometimes and have neglected other stuff.
Thanks
Going on what user Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert said earlier with "together they peek just over the edge", well with what I've come up with, the interviews by respected news sources etc., his contributions to major music magazines etc., collectively they well and truly sit on top of the table. And the Modern Drummer review proves it more. And this below, a C&P of what I edited into the article page,
According to La Scena Musicale, Stetina was booked along with Leo Kottke, Antoine Dufour, Ana Vidovic, and Jonathan Kreisberg to appear at the Wilson Center Guitar Competition & Festival which ran from August 13 to 15, 2015, at the Sharon Lynne Wilson Center for the Arts. La Scena Musicale, 3 August 2015 - International Guitar Legends Headlining Wilson Center Guitar Competition & Festival: 2015 Artists include Leo Kottke, Antoine Dufour, Ana Vidovic, Jonathan Kreisberg, Troy Stetina
It's obvious when Stetina is mentioned in the same headline such as these premier artists, he's well and widely known in various fields and notable. His volume of work speaks for itself, especially when artists such as Mark Tremonti, Michael Angelo Batio, Bill Peck, and Eric Friedman appear on Troy Stetina: The Sound and the Story etc. etc.. For him not to be notable would be an exception to the rule.
Yes, I see that you've opened an RSN discussion on Metal Shock. OK, what can I say.
The fact that Stetina has written for two of the two of the biggest selling guitar mags is additional proof of his status. He was employed by Guitar One and wrote for Guitar World. Just a quick grab of the Ozwinds site where it says, "Go inside the mind of one of the most accomplished guitar instructors in history", you said something previously that this was copied from his website. Well, perhaps one or two others may have done this, or he has copied on to his website what has been said about him. Most to the majority of sites refer to him as something similar, I guess this is because this is what he is!
To tell the truth I'm not that keen on heavy metal or this type of music. I had heard of Stetina in the past but didn't know that much about him. If I didn't think he was notable I would have just gone for a re-direct or maybe wouldn't have bothered at all.
Karl Twist ( talk) 06:56, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as I don't see a consensus yet and different assessments of the existing sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
21:29, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Source assessment table:
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
Left-Handed Guitar: The Complete Method by Stetina, Troy | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
Fretboard Mastery [With CD] by Troy Stetina | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
Guitar Noise | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
Modern Drummer Issue 166 | ![]() |
![]() |
~ This is a review of one of Stetina's books. There is no mention/ WP:SIGCOV of Stetina at all | ~ Partial |
Guitar One Magazine February 2006 | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
OnMilwaukee Interview | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
Metalshockfinland | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
Maximum Ink Interview | ![]() |
? A non-notable, local music magazine. Can't find editorial polices, editorial board, etc.. The interview also contains a link to Stetina's Wikipedia page at the bottom and links to purchase the subject's CDs. Appears WP:QS and WP:PROMOTIONAL | ![]() |
✘ No |
guitariste-metal.fr | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
Ad in La Seine Musicale | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
The Journal Times | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✔ Yes |
Billboard Jan 1995 | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
www.ultimate-guitar.com | ? Likely a press release | ![]() |
![]() |
✘ No |
Musicradar | ![]() |
![]() |
~ | ✘ No |
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}. |
Dr. Swag Lord ( talk) 20:26, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
I even more stand by what I said that Stetina is a notable subject. His being a writer for two of the largest guitar mags in the US as well as holding guitar clinics in events that have internationally known prestigious artists is just one aspect. Many others ... etc. etc. etc. Below is an interesting indicator from Jstor,
...and Heavy Metal Lead Guitar Vol. 1&2 by Troy Stetina are two such examples. Also noteworthy is his 1991,
Speed Mechanics for Lead Guitar In an interview with Guitariste Métal, Stetina was asked about his sales figure
he replied: Speed Mechanics for Lead Guitar is the biggest seller now. Maybe 300,000...
Thanks Karl Twist ( talk) 04:35, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎
11:38, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
I'd originally PROD'ed this, that was removed. Bringing it to AfD as I still don't think the sources support notability. I was and am unable to find sourcing about this individual, only things they've written. Unsure if this would pass academic notability or notability for business people. Oaktree b ( talk) 18:56, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
23:19, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
...and so on. My thinking is that Cooper is too early in his career to have become ‘notable’ in the sense we use here. --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 01:37, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More discussion as to whether this individual passes
WP:NPROF's subject-specific criteria would be helpful in achieving a consensus here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
Red-tailed hawk
(nest)
01:28, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist in lieu of closing this as "No consensus". As one editor stated, this is borderline, with different editors assessing PROF contributions differently so we need to move the needle one way or the other.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk!
01:25, 28 June 2024 (UTC)